This may set up the next milestone prize for low cost to space. The X-Prize officials may what to see if NASA is willing to set this up threw the X-Prize. They will need to hammer out the details with NASA if they are interested.

"Centennial Challenges will be modeled on past successes, including 19th century navigation prizes, early 20th century aviation prizes, and more recent prizes offered by the US government and private sector. Examples of potential Challenges include very low-cost robotic space missions; contests to demonstrate rover systems that are highly mobile, capable, and survivable; and fundamental advances in technical areas like lander navigation, spacecraft power systems, life detection sensors, and nano-materials."

can companies from other countries enter for these prizes or must they be American?

I went to the CC website: "US citizens who are not federal employees (including FFRDCs) unless otherwise specified in challenge rules. Industry, academa, non-profits, students, individuals. Contestants will be required to register." So it sounds like non US citizens can compete only if they are part of a US company, or if the prize waives the restriction.

One interesting idea might be to have NASA, ESA, and the Japanese put up the money for prizes jointly, so that any citizen from American, Europe, or Japan can compete.

The reason why I said this is because theoretically American companies could win these prizes using tech that was developed at high cost in countries other than America. As the companies that actually develop them cannot compete, it seems a little unfair.

It's an interesting question ... should America be obliged to open high tech development competitions to non-American interests ... given the exchange of ideas and rapid technology exchanges going on there is unfortunately a strong, and military argument, against holding open competitions in the name of national security.

High technology transfer is a scary thing when it's transfered to an entity beyond the reach of the regulatory body overseeing the competition (in this case, ultimately, the US government).

As NASA is a child of governmental development it must abide by the requirements of its "parent company" who is essentially in competition with other similar "companies" with similar (or lesser) resources to maintain its place in the world. A place which currently allows it to dictate terms of foreign policy, not something to be gambled with.

as to us companies using non-us technology that's not a problem at all as long as it's solved in the same way any normal business is conducted between the originator and the us company (there's a flow of technology into the us as well you know, not everything was/is invented there )

as it is nasa already has a very international tinge: people from other countries working with them on projects etc.

i don't see nasa having a national program to encourage space related efforts as a problem at all (all national space agencies i know of have such programs, and nasa has tried to do this in various ways before as well) unless it makes people think that private efforts are not longer needed - because private space companies are just as important as before (read/think: very important )

My concern is simply that this programme does not stunt technological growth in the private space travel sector instead of promoting it. The great thing about the Ansari X-prize is the fact that any company which is serious about the aim of it can enter, no matter where they come from. I would just like the international flavour of this new era in space travel to continue.

My concern is simply that this programme does not stunt technological growth in the private space travel sector instead of promoting it.

I'm a bit confused. How could offering prizes for technological innovation result in stifling technological innovation?

nova made the rightful distinction between technological innovation by private companies and governmental space agencies - i.e. a kind of brain drain hurting the quest for cheap and profitable space access (which i doubt nasa and the like will ever deliver)

nova made the rightful distinction between technological innovation by private companies and governmental space agencies - i.e. a kind of brain drain hurting the quest for cheap and profitable space access (which i doubt nasa and the like will ever deliver)

The Centennial Challenges program isn't paying for government research, it's offering incentives for private innovation. CC should make it easier for private companies to invent new space technologies, since now they have the sponsorship opportunities and monetary incentive of a prize.

What n54 said is one take on that, a plausible one too. Another is that technological innovation is aided by the most number of groups attempting the same challenge, look at the X-prize and all the weird and wacky designs that are being attempted (some weirder than others). The point is that some will succeed and some will fail but the more in the running the better the chances of finding a good solution. Also, if your are a non American company seeing American ones getting the prizes for novel technological development and you are not, would you share your ideas and risk someone else profiteering from them or would you be more inclined to stick to tried and tested methods? Oh yeah it's allright for US companies, but is it allright for space tech in general? We shall see.

nova made the rightful distinction between technological innovation by private companies and governmental space agencies - i.e. a kind of brain drain hurting the quest for cheap and profitable space access (which i doubt nasa and the like will ever deliver)

The Centennial Challenges program isn't paying for government research, it's offering incentives for private innovation. CC should make it easier for private companies to invent new space technologies, since now they have the sponsorship opportunities and monetary incentive of a prize.

yes but private innovation towards the goals of nasa, so the brain drain scenario still stands

and i don't think nasa aims to bring cheap access to orbit for all any more than they aim (at present) to bring cheap access to sub-orbit for all - it's simply not their job (and if they pretend otherwise in the statute of the cc i bet it will be rooted out fairly quickly in any future budget negotiations)